Conversation and the Blogosphere

In my book Conversation: A History of a Declining Art, I quote a number of writers who argue that the blogosphere stokes political polarization, so I expected that my book would be attacked by many bloggers who think the blogosphere improves political discussion. To my surprise, there were more favorable remarks about my book than attacks. But most of the favorable comments were based on reviews of my book, not on a reading of the book itself. Very few bloggers who mention my book said that they read it, though many said that they planned to read it.  Secondly, I was amazed by how global the blogosphere is. I expected bloggers to comment on it in the U.S., Canada, England, and Australia, since my book got a lot of attention in these countries, but bloggers in Denmark, France, and India also commented on it. In India a blogsite is holding a blog assessment contest and the winner gets a free copy of my book!  Third, I was struck by the wide variety of people who commented on my book—a Lutheran church member, a philosopher, a business management guru, an arbitration specialist, a city planner, and many more.  Finally, a number of bloggers reprinted favorable reviews of my books—or excerpts from a favorable review.  In general, bloggers have helped to spread the word about my book. (No author is going to complain about getting more attention, even unfavorable attention.)  And some bloggers have made amusing and perceptive comments about my book and about conversation in general. One blogger said that he has the best conversations in the YMCA sauna. He suspects conversation flourishes in saunas because no one brings a cell phone into one. 

Now for a few negative comments.  Some bloggers’ comments—favorable or unfavorable—were based on no information whatsoever, only on the title of the book (one blogger called the title “absurd” because conversation has always been in bad shape). What is the point, I wonder, of sounding off in this manner? To be blunt, many bloggers’ comments were, to my mind, puerile.  How many?  Roughly 25%, which I suppose is not that high.  Also one wonders how carefully some bloggers read.  One blogger, quoting from a review of my book in the Times Literary Supplement, confused me with the reviewer—saying that I had the opportunity to sit in on conversations with Jorge Luis Borges and two friends in Buenos Aires in the mid-1960s. I have never been to Buenos Aires and my knowledge of Spanish is limited. 

Has reading these blogs changed my view of conversation?  Not at all. I still think that raillery is impossible in the virtual world. And many observers agree with me—including a blogger who wrote an interesting commentary about a review of my book. (See “Do Bloggers Converse?” posted on the jadedlistener blogsite.)

Samuel Johnson, who is a major figure in my book, often speaks about regulating the passions. I would hope that people regulate their passion for being online. When used in moderation, the blogosphere is fascinating.  But it is not a substitute for real conversation. I agree with a woman in Starbucks who was recently quoted in the Washington Post: “Real communication isn’t just about what you say. It’s about how you look, how you move. And I think we’re losing that.”

Please share widely!

0

0